Case 3335281/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Kayongo v Regency Cleaning Services Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3335281/2018
- Decision date
- 19 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Milner-Moore
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Kayongo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs J Kayongo worked as a cleaner for Maiden Erlegh School from 2 December 2013 and transferred to Regency Cleaning Services Ltd on 1 August 2018 under TUPE. Before the transfer she raised queries by email about pension arrangements, overtime and terms and conditions, and the tribunal accepted that she had concerns about whether her existing terms would be honoured. The tribunal found, however, that the respondent was in fact complying with TUPE, including by preserving sick pay and putting in place arrangements for LGPS membership and pension back payments, albeit belatedly.
The central dispute was what happened on 4 September 2018. The claimant said Mr Penny told her she would not be paid and that she did not work for the respondent, which she treated as a dismissal. Mr Penny said the claimant left after being challenged about arriving early, about the work she had done, and after being asked to remain for a briefing with other cleaners. The tribunal preferred the respondent's evidence, rejected the claimant's account of an express dismissal, and found that she chose to resign.
Having found no express dismissal, the tribunal considered constructive dismissal under section 95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, applying the principles in Western Excavating v Sharp and Malik v BCCI. It held that the respondent's failure to answer one overtime query, its inability at that point to confirm the final pension position, and its conduct on 4 September did not amount to a fundamental breach of contract or a breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The tribunal noted that the respondent had reasonable and proper cause to expect the claimant to arrive at the normal time, to ask what work she had done while unsupervised, and to ask her to stay for a briefing.
The claim for unfair dismissal therefore failed in full. No remedy was awarded, and the tribunal made no compensation findings because it concluded that there was neither an actual dismissal nor a constructive dismissal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that Mrs Kayongo was not dismissed by the respondent and instead resigned on 4 September 2018. It further held that the resignation did not amount to a constructive dismissal because the respondent's conduct, including its handling of the transfer, pension queries, and the events of 4 September, did not amount to a fundamental breach of contract or a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 95(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Western Excavating v Sharp
- Malik v BCCI
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.